Have you read Dostoevsky? That's it! There's no depth. Moreover, Dostoevsky deliberately emphasizes that all the experiences of the characters are the consequences of a rather brief depression, which, in turn, stems from a midlife crisis. Two men under forty suddenly wanted to feel more than they really are. The womanizer wanted to believe that he had Great Love in his life, the “eternal husband” – that he was not just a spineless cuckold and a little masochist, but a strange and dangerous type. Therefore, the two of them perform a performance for themselves and for others for a while, in the process of which a truly pitiful character dies (deserving, but not defiant, for furniture). In the final of the book, both heroes return to their usual lives: Donjouan goes to another mistress (and regrets that he did not get on the way to another), and the husband again marries a lady prone to cheating. Everything!
If there’s one thing I’m protesting about in the film, it’s an attempt to magnify the drama by bringing the tragic event closer to the finale. IMHO, the ending from Dostoevsky suited much better here! In general, in the book, the sworn friends continued to communicate after the disaster, because, in fact, they did not suffer so much. You can say that Tim Roth played the emotions badly, but in my opinion, he just showed the obvious (I have to remove all my thoughts, because the spoiler).
And because of some indistinctness in this respect (with respect to the tragedy), the authors decided to focus on what Dostoevsky does not have, but only mentioned - on the acquaintance and development of relations between the hero Tim Roth and the heroine. In a horizontal, so to speak, direction... I won’t lie that I don’t like it! In addition to eroticism (cool!), here, in the first part of the film, there are many hilariously funny episodes. Look and rejoice... and do not demand what even Dostoevsky himself did not have!
8 out of 10
Original
